Civic vs. Corolla vs. Dart vs. Elantra vs. Jetta vs. Mazda3 vs. Forte

In our most recent small sedan tests, we reported on the class' progress in overtaking midsize sedans to become the best-selling car segment, opining that perhaps this signaled a convergence in North American and European tastes. C-cars rule over there, and wouldn't we feel that much more virtuous, parsimonious, and efficient if we'd all just squish into smaller cars? Nah. Our roomy parking lots and boulevards fit bigger cars, and bigger cars fit us better. Besides, newfound energy reserves have brought our nation closer than ever to energy independence, and with gas prices still a fraction of Europe's, we feel less compelled to downsize. Nevertheless, the compact C segment grew 7.8 percent last year, while midsize C/D sales barely wiggled. Might stylish, highly equipped, great-driving compact cars now be making the grade on their merits and features, rather than on moral or fiscal imperatives?

To wit: Today's compacts offer S-Class-worthy gear such as adaptive cruise control, collision warning, blind-spot monitoring, all-LED headlamps, and full telematics connectivity. For this gathering we aimed for the heart of the segment, establishing a $22,500 base-price ceiling, with an as-tested price target of $25K. The guest list started with the defending champ Kia Forte (EX), to which we added the all-new Mazda3 (i Touring) and Toyota Corolla (LE Eco Plus), the freshened Hyundai Elantra (Limited—restyled, upgraded nav, infotainment, and telematics) and Honda Civic (EX—new CVT, user interface), and VW Jetta (SE—new 1.8-liter turbo). Then, because our last Dodge Dart finished third despite our carping about its 1.4T engine and dry dual-clutch tranny, we invited a 2.4-liter GT with a regular six-speed automatic. We also invited a Ford Focus, because its maligned DDTC trans has since been reprogrammed, but none was available.

What about the Ford Focus, Chevrolet Cruze, Nissan Sentra, Subaru Impreza, and Mitsubishi Lancer? Read the accompanying WOT story HERE.Before we strapped into the left-front chairs, we spent an afternoon grading rear-seat room, comfort, and cargo friendliness. We installed forward and rear-facing child seats into the back seats, then assessed the remaining space for Uncle Frank to sit between them as he used to do when accompanying his twin niece and nephew in Sis' 2000 Corolla. We also assembled reams of data on safety, ownership costs, performance, and fuel economy. Then all voters piloted each car around a loop involving 7 miles of city driving, 12 miles of freeway, and 7 miles of twisty canyon roads. Read on to see how the top five fared.

Ride & Handling

The Mazda3's in-town ride quality is a tad sharper-edged than that of the others, but mass-reduction efforts clearly left some sound-deadeners behind, as it seemed to be the loudest freeway cruiser. On the twisties, however, this engine's snarl, the chassis' agility, the best-in-test steering feel, and the well-bolstered seats earn straight As and encourage miscreant cornering behavior. Testing director Kim Reynolds was surprised the Mazda felt "nose-heavy, yawing at a noticeably slower natural frequency" on the figure-eight course, but it managed to edge out the much quicker and more powerful Jetta by a precious tenth to win that test. And the spry Mazda3 truly shone on Mulholland Highway, prompting executive editor Ron Kiino to declare it the "best driver here—great steering, nice ride, fun and sporty handling." Most of us agreed.

The zippy little Forte also acquitted itself well on the curves of Mulholland Highway, with a ride that managed to feel firm and well-buttoned, without jiggling our giblets over the rough stuff. The Forte impressed Reynolds on the figure-eight course, demonstrating "the Forte's solidity and refinement with a slightly nimbler feel and tremendously improved steering," though its performance in that test was mid-pack, partly because of its lateral grip of 0.80 g, which put it in last place.

Read the 2014 Volkswagen Jetta 1.8T SE First Test HERE.The Jetta's ride quality struck many as a bit abrupt, but the payoff is delightful handling on the twisty roads. Kiino dubbed it "a GLI light." Evans found it to be "the most solid and confident all-around handler here. Not playful like the Mazda, but locked down like the Dodge, with less head toss and gut-shake." Febbo lauded its chassis refinement and powertrain -- and accommodation for his taller-than-average frame -- declaring it the car in this test he would buy for himself.The Dart GT certainly hangs on tight in the turns, but provides minimal feedback through wheel. Wearing the group's only 18-inch rubber, it clamped the road with a best-in-test 0.85g of max-lateral grip and logged a second-best stopping distance of 117 feet from 60 mph. Figure-eight performance trailed only the Jetta and Kia. Mike Febbo declared the Dart to have "the worst ride quality of the group. The Dart bottomed and topped out on the canyon section." He also found the quickest-in-test 12.8:1 steering to be "way too fast. Like they are shooting for that Mini Cooper quickness, but without the subtlety that lets you drive with your palms in a Mini." A less punishing option for those smitten with the looks and feature richness might be to order this drivetrain in an SXT.

Read the 2014 Dodge Dart GT First Test HERE.The Civic's steering feels feathery light, and its highway ride is fairly plush and quiet. While it has a light, nimble feeling on twisty roads, associate editor Mike Febbo found that "it kind of pogos around on the four corners. I want it to settle down and feel like a bigger car." It did stop shortest, in just 116 feet from 60 mph. The car doesn't encourage aggressive cornering (as its slowest-in-test figure-eight performance attests), but it obliges competently if you insist. Associate online editor Benson Kong dubbed it "the hands-down snoozer of this septet."Hyundai's Elantra feels heftier and more substantial than the Civic. The sport steering felt overly heavy in town, but on the road it behaved well, requiring far less "herding" than we have noted in the past and displaying less body roll than we recall. It has none of the overt personality traits present in the Dart and Jetta, projecting more of a solid-citizen persona instead. Referring to its ability to do everything acceptably, and nothing exceptionally, Febbo opined, "This would be an ideal autonomous car."As with the Civic and Elantra, the Corolla lets the driver know it's not looking forward to Mulholland Highway, but it begrudgingly goes along, with just a few peccadillos. Febbo noted, "The rear axle steers the car on bumpy pavement—like having a back-seat driver who has a few degrees of control." The steering lacks feel, and Kiino found it a bit wandery on the freeway. The fact that it's the lone entry with drum brakes says much about Toyota's dynamic aspirations for the Corolla, which Kong believes is aimed at folks who eat in their cars. "The 17.8:1 steering ratio (what is this, a pickup?) makes the car feel mushy, but the slow inputs are helpful when fishing around for a dropped salad fork." Reynolds managed to overheat the CVT, prompting a brief limp mode after a few laps of the figure eight.

Performance

If your prime objective is finding a compact that will ensure victory in stoplight grands prix, look no further than VW's turbo Jetta. As associate editor Scott Evans noted, "All the money is under the hood," and it dashes from naught to 60 in 7.3 seconds. Just be aware that its turbocharged power delivery feels non-linear, and the car is prone to easy wheelspin in town. At some load/speed conditions there's a guttural noise and vibration. Sadly, the second-heaviest car in the test also logged the worst braking performance at 124 feet from 60 mph, which, along with mid-pack lateral grip (0.82 g) allowed the Mazda to triumph on the figure-eight course.Among the better-rounded finalists, the Forte is quickest, producing 3 more hp than the VW, but 30 fewer lb-ft. With gearing that ranks second or third shortest in most ratios, it scoots to 60 mph in 8.1 seconds, but does so with the exhaust note of a clogged Dyson vacuum.That the Mazda3 i accelerates just a tenth or two slower than the Kia—despite its 18-horse power deficit and gearing that averages 16 percent taller—while acing the fuel-economy tests is testament to the Skyactiv engineering team. Evans credits the transmission: "It's eager to drop a gear and get you going when you want, though it doesn't always shift as smoothly as the Hyundai's or Kia's."Relative to the 1.4-liter we tested in our last Dart, the 2.4-liter's engine note is far more pleasing, and the conventional automatic performs well. Dodge sells its performance and mass at the lowest rates: $137/hp and $7.63/lb. Its weight-to-power ratio ranks third best, and Febbo declared the Tigershark "probably the best naturally aspirated engine in the group. Never really feels like it's struggling," though he took issue with its overly aggressive throttle tip-in and the lack of a transmission sport mode. "Anything trying this hard to be sporty needs a sport mode and shift paddles." Despite gearing that's about neck and neck with the Jetta for shortest, acceleration ends up mid-pack, with the 60-mph dash taking 8.7 seconds. Basically, this is a horses-up-high engine, as opposed to the torque-down-low turbo approach VW offers in our Jetta. Kong noted, "Good power for the class with a lot of engine noise thrown in for free," and Evans noted some driveline lash in on/off throttle conditions in town.

Laying claim to one of the best transmissions in the test is the Honda, which Evans declared "the best front-drive CVT on the market," praising its responsive tuning, good kick-down for freeway merging, and its S-mode ability to maintain about 3300 rpm for most of the Mulholland Highway run.

Febbo was less taken with the engine bolted next to the transmission, lamenting the fact that it lacked "that high-end VTEC surge I associate with fun Hondas." The Civic's 9.0-second 0-60-mph ranked midpack. That's disappointing for the lightest car in the test (2802 pounds), but its braking led all others at 116 feet from 60 mph.The Elantra's 1.8-liter port-injected engine runs a bit coarse, vibrating the steering wheel at certain engine speeds, and it labors hard against the second-highest burden per horsepower (20 pounds, trailing only the Corolla). So it's no surprise that its acceleration trails the pack, with a poky 9.6-second 0-60-mph run. At least, the six-speed automatic impressed us with its seamless shifting.The Corolla's sole performance brag is this: Despite having the least power and torque and the tallest gearing, it outdragged the Elantra with a 9.3-second 0-60 time, all the while broadcasting an anemic and pitiful exhaust note. Toyota could learn a lot from Honda about CVT tuning if/when delighting drivers becomes a corporate priority. Maximizing fuel economy was the apparent goal here, as the tall gearing and broadest ratio spread attest. Evans found the Corolla's CVT to change ratios less smoothly than the Honda's. At least the CVT is an immense improvement over the hoary four-speed auto it replaces.

Efficiency

The undisputed valedictorian of this class is the Mazda3, which earns the highest EPA and Real MPG ratings with no dramatic hybridization, downsizing and turbocharging, CVT or nine-speed transmission. Our i model test car didn't even feature the i-ELOOP smart-charging regenerative-energy storage capacitor. Its Skyactiv suite of technologies is centered around direct fuel injection and a 13:1 compression ratio, plus a holistic focus on all drivetrain components to eliminate friction, optimize combustion, and maximize operating efficiency. That, plus slick aerodynamics, the tallest gearing of the conventional automatics (by about 15 percent), and a curb weight below 2900 pounds produce 34 mpg combined EPA economy that our Real MPG testing bested with 36 mpg. Second- and third-place rankings go to the similarly spec'd Toyota and Honda, which both feature 1.8-liter port-injected engines of similar output driving through continuously variable transmissions. The Civic boasts eco-coaching color bars flanking the speedometer that glow green during good behavior, blue otherwise. As noted, its 2802-pound curb weight is lightest in this group, with the Toyota ranking next at 2887.The Toyota edges out the Honda by a single combined mpg, both on the EPA dynos and on our Real MPG test loop (34 to 33 mpg), thanks to the reduced pumping losses and improved breathing afforded by its Valvematic dual-variable valve timing and lift valvetrain. (The Honda makes do with VTEC on a single cam.) The Toyota's overall gearing is about 7 percent taller than the Honda's, which trades away a few precious tenths of acceleration for fuel economy.

Despite MultiAir II valvetrain magic, the 3293-pound Dart ranked last, both with EPA (26 combined) and Real MPG (27), but it demonstrated less thirst during our drive-loop flogging than the 1.4T we caned last June. The turbo Jetta surprised us with a 32-mpg combined rating on Real MPG. That ranked VW fourth and handily outperformed the EPA's 29 mpg.The multiport-injected 1.8-liter Hyundai and the perkier direct-injected 2.0-liter Kia brought up the rear of the finalists with EPA ratings of 31 and 28 mpg, respectively, and Real MPG figures of 30 and 31 mpg. Between these two similarly priced offerings, we vastly prefer the Kia's larger 2.0-liter direct-injected engine for its ability to deliver noticeably better real-world fuel economy when driven conservatively, then provide superior performance should you need to drop the hammer. It should be noted that all seven contestants—even the turbo Vee-Dub—require only regular unleaded fuel.

Cockpit/Cabin

From the driver's seat, Mazda's state-of-the-art user interface was deemed best in test, offering easy Bluetooth phone pairing with full Pandora/Aha/Stitcher control. Everything looks upscale in the BMW 3 Series-inspired cockpit, though Kiino questioned the LCD tach, which he found "so small, it borders on humorous." Associate online editor Nate Martinez lamented the lack of storage for loose items, and our shortest voter, copy chief Emiliana Sandoval, couldn't get comfortable in the too-low seat, with the headrest thrusting her head forward. Next best was the Kia, which Kong proclaimed "the most premium-feeling car present," lauding "the weight of the rotary knobs on the center stack and the heft of the shifter." He may have also been wowed by its feature content, which also sold some on the Elantra. The Hyundai also boasts the roomiest front seats. Honda's fancy HDMI connection requires a brand-new smartphone and Honda Link app to access the features, and the stereo desperately needs a volume knob, but the hi-def screens look fancy. The vaguely retro Corolla dash pleased voters with its interesting use of contrast and the metallic root-beer brown accent encircling the passengers, but Kiino dinged its low-mounted center screen and our tallest voter, Febbo, found its seat too small and utterly lacking in support.The Jetta's Bluetooth connection was unintuitive to establish, and its old-style iPhone/iPod cable doesn't support an iPhone 4S. What's more, there's no USB jack—just an old-timey aux jack. How ya gonna attract the cool kids with outdated connectivity? The Dart's seat feels pillowy compared with the Jetta's, but its stitched soft-touch dash looks expensive, and the heated steering wheel is a plus. Febbo wondered aloud, "Why are the door pulls coated in the same material I dip pliers' handles in?" And Sandoval declared it to be a "masculine car. Like being in a man cave with a big screen TV."

The back-seat champ is the Corolla, with 41.4 inches of rear-seat legroom—3.3 more than the next best Jetta—it's a compact limo with a nearly flat floor, but there are no feature frills, not even a center armrest. VW took the two-aboard comfort prize, boasting nearly as much space as the Toyota and slightly comfier cushions, plus the group's only rear-compartment 12-volt socket and handy coathooks on the B-pillars for stashing that sport coat. A rearward-jutting center console crowds the third rider, however. The headrests don't come out, complicating attachment of upper child-seat tethers, but Uncle Frank fits between two kiddie seats almost comfortably.The Kia cleverly thrusts middle-seat adult riders forward far enough to prevent their shoulders from resting on those of the outboard occupants, and with a low tunnel, the Forte ranked highly for three passengers. Hyundai did not copy this feature, and hence three abreast overlap a lot, but they all enjoy more headroom. The Elantra's lower child-seat LATCH hooks were deemed easiest to find and use.The Dodge feels extremely roomy and features a higher, more upright seat with better toe room under the front chairs than most, but the plunging window line compromises visibility and ingress/egress, and our center-seat tester's head touched the ceiling. The Dart's rear doors don't open as far as in the other cars', which makes child-seat maneuvering trickier, and this was one of only three cars in which the rear-facing child seat did not fit behind a 5-foot-10-inch driver's seating position. Non-removable headrests further complicate attachment of the upper LATCH tether.The Honda's nearly flat floor was best for three-aboard foot room, but smallest-in-test dimensions cramped us everywhere else, our rear-facing child seat didn't fit behind the driver's position (nor did it in the Mazda), and this was the only car into which Uncle Frank was absolutely unwilling to jam between two carseats for a ride to the bounce-house emporium. The Mazda rear seat feels lowest, at least relative to the windows, so smaller people may not see out as well, but it ranks as third roomiest overall and features deeper bucketing.

Features and Amenities

Model

wt

Dodge Dart GT

Honda Civic EX

Hyundai Elantra Limited

Kia Forte EX

Mazda3 i Touring

Toyota Corolla LE Eco Plus

Volkswagen Jetta SE

Keyless entry/starting

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Heated steering wheel

3

1

1

Cooled front seat

2

1

Heated front seats

3

1

1

1

1

Heated rear seats

3

1

1

Automatic temp control ATC

3

1

1

1

1.5

1.5

1

Power folding mirrors

2

1

Navigation

4

1

1

1

1

1

8" touch screen and 4" I/P disp

3

1

Speed limit info on nav

1

Sirius/XM/HD travel link

2

1

1

1

1

1

CD player

1

1

1

1

1

1

Pandora app

1

1

1

1.2

Text message reading

1

1

Auto headlamps

1

1

1

1

1

Trip computer

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Homelink

3

1

1

Rear map lights

1

1

1

Eco button

1

1

1

1

1

OnStar/BlueLink Telematics

4

1

1

1

Rear seat vents

1

1

Memory seats

2

1

Blind spot monitoring

4

1

Manual seats

-2

1

0.5

Sunroof

4

1

1

1

1

1

Backup camera

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

Remote start

3

1

Full-size spare tire

3

1

Mini-spare tire

1

1

1

1

Map pocket behind both seats

1

1

Power lock switch in rear

1

1

No rear armrest

-1

1

Three adjustable rr headrests

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Trunk-mounted seat releases

1

1

1

1

1

1

Embroidered cargo mats

1

1

1

1

Fog lamps

2

1

1

1

1

SCORE

39

22

39

53.5

28.7

28

19

RANKING

2

6

2

1

4

5

7

Safety

The new IIHS small-overlap frontal crash test is certainly sorting out the really new cars and astute engineering teams from the refreshes and the amateurs. Most disconcerting of the crash results was the brand-new Kia Forte. Not only did it get a disappointing "poor" rating on the small-overlap test -- a curious two steps down from its Hyundai platform-mate -- but it also mustered only three stars in NHTSA's old tried-and-true full-frontal test. It's too bad that the lengthy laundry list of features lacks any collision-warning/prevention gizmos, because it appears that occupants could genuinely benefit from them. Perhaps even more concerning is the new Corolla, which just managed a "marginal" rating on the new IIHS test. That's enough to ruin its chances to earn the Institute's coveted top-safety pick rating, thereby ranking the all-new Corolla in the bottom 40 percent of all vehicles rated between 2011 and 2014. The world expects better from mighty Toyota, and hence we anticipate a mid-cycle reengineering job to arrive very soon. In the meantime, at least it trumps the rest of the crowd with driver knee and passenger thigh (seat-cushion mounted) airbags. The Elantra's "acceptable" rating earns it a TSP ranking, and it also gets five stars overall from NHTSA, but the real stars of this test were the Civic and Mazda3, both of which aced the small-offset test with a "good" rating, bringing home Top Safety Pick-Plus kudos. Finally, the Mazda3's five-star full frontal and overall NHTSA test results trump Civic's four stars in the full-frontal test, giving us a clear safety winner. Our partners at Informedforlife.org caution that as the Honda and Mazda3 both weigh well under 3200 pounds (as do all finalists), their curb weights incur fatality risk rates 20 and 14 percent worse than average, respectively. Only the Dart weighed in above that figure, which, along with its "acceptable" small-offset rating and a five-star overall NHTSA ranking, puts it among the top-3 percent of safest vehicles, per Informedforlife.org.The Jetta's "marginal" IIHS result and four-star frontal NHTSA rating deprive it of TSP status, and its weight adds 10 percent to your fatality likelihood.

Value

Each of these pocket sedans makes a fairly strong value proposition for itself, just tailored to a slightly different set of priorities. Our contenders were loaded with features that only the priciest entry lux cars offered a few short years ago—keyless entry and starting , trip computers, navigation (it's a $59 add-on at Honda), backup camera, and automatic climate control (VW lacked those last three).Folks who judge value primarily on a car's gizmos-and-gadgets count will have little trouble justifying the two priciest cars in this test, which are both Korean. Our plucky little Kia boasts roughly 40 percent more gear for the green than the Hyundai in our value-weighted features tally, at a sticker price just $280 more. And, bonus! It gets 2.0-liters' worth of direct-injected engine to tow that gear around, whereas the Elantra makes do with 1.8. Tying the Hyundai on the fancy-features count is the dapper Dart, whose red-stitched dash and big-screen TVs suggest class-above status. Sadly, the hard plastic door trim and some areas of indifferent build quality argue against that suggestion, and you're certainly paying for the features, as this is the third-priciest car in the test (following the Koreans). More gizmos mean more things to go wrong, but the Koreans cover you from bumper to bumper for five years or 60,000 miles (with roadside assistance—the others typically cover 3/36).

Is interior space your thing? Toyota's selling it at just $186/cubic foot, as it boasts the biggest back seat and largest combined interior and trunk space in the test, at the second-lowest as tested price. Note also that, with the second best EPA and Real MPG ratings, it won't cost much to move that space around. The Koreans charge the most per cubic foot of space, at $212 for both. The Civic is the smallest inside, cheapest to buy, with meager amenities, but its big high-def screen, HDMI input, savvy CVT, and exceptional build quality make a "more with less" value proposition. Honda's sterling reliability reputation and safety scores bolster its value bona fides. Driving enthusiasts obviously get the best bang for their buck with the Mazda, which is all the more impressive given its aforementioned petrol parsimony. Just be aware that it ranks fourth in our gizmo tally, and a lack of sound deadening (to save weight) makes it the noisiest highway cruiser.

Cost of Ownership

Toyota aces this one, with the lowest target purchase price, least depreciation, and second-lowest fuel and maintenance tallies, for an overall five-year COO that undercuts the next-best Mazda by $1106. The Mazda undercuts the Honda's depreciation by 3 percentage points, and the Koreans' repair costs average a third of those of the rest of the contenders. (Long warranties leave only 10,000 miles of repair exposure, and maintenance items such as brakes and tires cost significantly less.) The Civic is cheapest to maintain despite Toyota and VW covering maintenance for the first two years, but its ownership-cost/target price ratio disappointingly ranked last among our finalists. The Jetta and Dart were eliminated in part because of their sixth- and seventh-place rankings in most of the COO categories, though the Dodge earned the lowest repair-cost rating of the non-Koreans and the Jetta had the third lowest insurance costs.

Dodge Dart GT

Honda Civic EX

Hyundai Elantra Limited

Kia Forte EX

AVG STATE FEES

$398

$386

$405

$405

DEPRECIATION

$14,401 (56%)

$11,231 (49%)

$14,176 (53%)

$13,411 (52%)

FINANCING

$2,702

$2,408

$2,783

$2,677

INSURANCE

$6,981

$7,256

$7,778

$7,247

FUEL

$8,947

$7,463

$7,805

$8,384

MAINTENANCE

$2,701

$1,707

$2,234

$1,876

REPAIRS

$509

$561

$170

$167

5-YEAR COST OF OWNERSHIP

$36,639

$31,012

$35,350

$34,166

INTELLICHOICE Target Purchase Price

$25,848

$23,027

$26,629

$25,604

PURCHASE PRICE: Target purchase price includes destination and average applicable state taxes applied to a transaction price between invoice and retail, based on applicable incentives.

Mazda3 i Touring

Toyota Corolla LE Eco Plus

Volkswagen Jetta SE

AVG STATE FEES

$398

$386

$405

DEPRECIATION

$11,022 (46%)

$9313 (41%)

$14,301 (57%)

FINANCING

$2,502

$2,384

$2,618

INSURANCE

$6,889

$7,620

$7,101

FUEL

$7,034

$7,441

$8,216

MAINTENANCE

$2,130

$1,799

$2,277

REPAIRS

$639

$558

$739

5-YEAR COST OF OWNERSHIP

$30,615

$29,509

$35,646

INTELLICHOICE Target Purchase Price

$23,934

$22,810

$25,061

PURCHASE PRICE: Target purchase price includes destination and average applicable state taxes applied to a transaction price between invoice and retail, based on applicable incentives.

Conclusion

Our favorite car to look at was the Home-Depot orange Dart. "Love the exterior lines and sexy shape. It's arguably the best-looking small car out there," says Kiino. "I really want to love this car, but I just like it," says Evans. "Too many drawbacks to really love it, and I'd have to live at the end of a fantastic driving road to make the ride/handling trade-off of this GT pencil out." That plus those killer ownership costs and a back seat that was carseat unfriendly sealed the Dodge's last-place fate. Our turbocharged Teutonic torpedo came next, its dynamic pros offset by troublesome safety scores, second-worst ownership costs, and a dearth of doodads. Kong summed it up thusly: "it's fun to drive, but aside from that and the visibly enormous trunk, there isn't much else to sell the car."

Finishing fifth is the smooth, mild-mannered Elantra, which Kong believes "scores well in the immediate gratification areas like styling, features, initial touch and feel, and price point," but, as Febbo acknowledges, it "is embarrassed by its overachieving little brother." Kiino succinctly summed up the Toyota's fourth-place positioning: "If a huge second row is important, the Corolla is your small car. You also get strong value and low COO, but you pay with your soul"…and maybe your life in a nasty small-overlap wreck.A brilliant new CVT, nicely refreshed cockpit, and impressive safety performance counterbalanced the Civic's tiny interior and meager feature content to land Honda squarely in third place. Paraphrasing several voters' sentiments, Sandoval declared, "If I were gonna slap my Hello Kitty license plate holder on any of them, it'd be the Forte. Damn that terrible safety rating." Damn it, indeed; though even if its crash results matched the Mazda's, worse ownership cost and fuel economy still earn it a silver medal. And so, again, the Mazda3 is our victor, delighting drivers, safetyniks, gadgetphiles, and fuel-sippers. Plus, Kiino declared it "feels like the most solid, highest quality, all of one piece" car in the group. If ever there was a C-car to buy strictly on its merits, this is it.

7th Place: Dodge Dart

A handsome handler, and you'll pay less per pound or per pony, but it costs the most in the long run.

6th Place: Volkswagen Jetta

How many bells and whistles must you trade for big turbo fun? Most of them.

5th Place: Hyundai Elantra

Jack of all compact virtues, master of none -- a solid-C all-arounder.

4th Place: Toyota Corolla

You could do yoga in the back seat -- and have way more fun than driving the car.

3rd Place: Honda Civic

Great tranny, brakes, and sticker price, but where's that magic Honda driving joy?

2nd Place: Kia Forte

A fantastic little car let down by a dodgy safety rating and high ownership costs.

*This number relates the given car to a 3200 lb. passenger car: 1.23=23% above the average driver death rate; 0.95=5% below avg. driver death rate for a 3200# car

**Vehicles that do not qualify as a TOP PICK rank in the bottom 40% of 2011-2014 vehicles rated by IIHS

TSP: To qualify for 2014 Top Safety Pick, a vehicle must earn good ratings in the moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests, as well as a good or acceptable rating in the small overlap front test.

TSP+: To qualify for 2014 Top Safety Pick+, a vehicle must meet the Top Safety Pick criteria, plus earn a basic, advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.

I think it's funny how everyone dogs the Corolla, especially Motor Trend. Toyota will be laughing all the way to the bank with it. There is a massive disconnect between these reviewers and what the average consumer wants in a car. I have drove all these cars. Mazda always wins yet will always sell the least. They are obnoxiously loud on the road and believe it or not some people don't like to feel every little bump and pebble come through the steering wheel. ALL Mazdas do this and it's annoying. The Kia is a great car but you can get a Corolla S fully loaded for around 3 grand less (which looks much better than the LE Eco). Civic is also more expensive than Corolla plus it's louder and lacks the comfort and space of the Toyota. The Hyundai is only good to look at...drives terrible. Worst steering feel and the engine sounds like a blender with a fork caught in it. Like I said, lets see which of these cars are in the top 5 in sales in the next few months. Watch the Toyota win!!

@Matthew SD Only reason Toyota might win is because people are sheep. I just gave my Corolla to my son and bought the new 2014 Mazda3 GT HB fpr myself. While I really liked my Corolla, it does not compare to the Mazda3. The Mazda is way quieter, way smoother, and way more fun to drive.

I read the whole thing, but I still don't get why the Dart is in last. It's safe, it has a great Nav system with easy voice control, it looks great, and despite a few plasticky parts and marginally worse gas mileage than the others, it's last. The Civic and Corolla are horrendously boring, aren't fun to drive, have minimal gadgets (especially Civic), and look lame.

If the criteria to win is a car that a lady in risk-management would love, by all means, enjoy the order.

Not to rag on the Mazda 3, which is the best car in the segment, but the Dart certainly doesn't deserve last with such a piss poor effort put forth by Toyota.

While I might agree the Mazda is the true "enthusiasts car" and probably contributed to the overall winner according to MT, I don't agree that it is the most practical for the average buyer, unless you are short in stature. I sat in this car recently at a local auto show earlier this year, and it is truly cramped for the average height person. In my eyes, the Kia Forte is truly the winner in this class of cars. It does offer the best in all categories and has a bit more room. I would however recommend this car to my mother, who owns a '91 240 SX coupe. She is 4'11" and this is a perfect car for her stature, and it offers everything she could ever want.

@StabilityControlOFF I am 5'10" and the Mazda3 fit me best. My son is 6'4" and the MAzda3 is the only one that fit him comfortably in the front passenger seat, It is always the main selling point for me for a car....front passenger space (have to admit I never looked at a Kia, simply because I would never buy a Kia....only looked at Corolla, Civic, Jetta and Mazda3).

The Mazda 3 is indeed the current front runner but clearly there are others here worth considering. Having driven a 3 2.0 6sp manual as well as a 2.5S auto these truly are indeed drivers cars. But as stated they are not the quiestest in this highly competitive segment. The Jetta is indeed the performance champ here and in my eyes should be rated higher in this comparison. The Kia with the 2.0 does have a family tie to the nu Elantra Sport with the same 2.0..why was that car not included? Well, in the next few months we will have update of both Focus/Cruze and possibly the Sentra with 1.6T of the Juke with over 200hp...seems like more good times are on the horizon..

I'm glad the Mazda won. It's the right choice. Admittedly, I'm a huge fan of Mazda, but am a huge fan of others on the list as well. The price discrepancy was sad to see, though. While the Mazda would've still won (even more-so as I mention below,) some of the others may have been able to come closer.

One thing to ponder is how much more of a whooping it would be if they had used the base Mazda 3s Touring instead of the i Touring, the base MSRP being $24,595. That's less than three other vehicles in this comparison, as-tested. The lead would've been that much greater by the Mazda, though, so I guess they didn't want one to beat the rest THAT bad.

I test drove every one of these on this list before making my decision for this purchase (including others not featured in this comparison.) I went with the Mazda 3. The last on my list, however, was the Toyota Corolla. For a point A to point B method of transportation, it does fine. But when I test drove one, it was about as fun as watching paint dry. Someone who isn't a driving enthusiast, however, would probably be just fine with it if the price is right.

I like to think of Toyota as an ice cube in a sea of popsicles. Sure, it's cold and refreshing, but where's the flavor? Even my old 2007 Mazda 5 Sport is more fun to drive than that thing! (Not a bit of rust on it, either.)

My one gripe on the Mazda 3 is (like many others) the road noise. While the sounds of my '14 S GT aren't as loud as a base, I would like to see more soundproofing. I may have some done after the warranty has expired. The lack of a full-sized spare is really lame, as well.

Next on my list was gonna be the VW Jetta, but I would've wanted the GLI (which until a direct comparison is done, I'm assuming is faster than the Mazda 3s sedan,) which loses in the fuel economy by a lot.

I would've liked to see others in this comparison, particularly the other two domestics.

The Jetta's rear headrests aren't removable--yeah, they are but it helps to have three hands and you may have to RTFM to discover the procedure. The Mazda3's driver seat is "too low"--there's a big lever on the bottom left side which manually adjusts the height through an extensive range.

@TD-40 Every time I see this road noise mentioned, I am a little surprised. My Mazda3 is the quietest car I have ever owned. Either I had duds in the past (which I doubt), or the MAzda3 is not as bad as people think.

Too bad you couldn't find a Ford Focus, it is only the best selling car in the world ... more than Corolla so far this year. Oh and while you are at it ... how about taking the high road in commentary - "its maligned DDTC trans has since been reprogrammed" - typical editing anymore today, drag in some dirt and then not have the subject able to defend itself. Just another reason why you guys are just in the zone opinions vs real automotive journalists ... guess that is the way we do things now ... sad.

Whatever happened to instrumented sound pressure level testing at idle and cruise? You would think, because these cars are so heavily used for long distance commuting, an interior sound level comparison would be somewhat relevant in the purchaser's decision-making process. Really, barely any mention even of subjective impressions of road noise or engine noise in this article.

I tried very hard to like the '14 Mazda 3... After an extended 2 hour test drive on the freeway and open area highways, I had to take some Tylenol to combat the headache I got thanks to it terribly loud and annoying road noise. Since Most of my driving is done on the open road, the Mazda 3 just won't work for me. Too bad because its driving dynamics were otherwise pretty good.

@Bruce LaHargoue When I did a very short test drive in a downtown area I couldn't tell the noise, thanks for commenting on what it sounds like on the fwy. I did notice, which I don't see in any of the reviews, is that you can't put a CD in the opening for it when the car is in park because the shifter is in the way. You have to shift to drive to get the CD in there (& hope you remember to put it back in reverse to get out of the driveway). Perhaps I am the only one who still listens to CDs??

@renata25@Cevanne It's more that I have a LOT of Cds & haven't downloaded them all on my computer & phone yet. Plus, to me some of the digital music stations don't have the same sound quality/depth as CDs, which is why I think my downloaded CDs sound better, plus I don't really want to listen to the ads on Pandora anyway & Sirius costs too much considering it cuts out every time I pass a tall tree (lots of those where I live), tall building (lots of those in the nearest downtown area I visit), bridge, tunnel & a couple of times passing a tall truck on the fwy. :-(

@Sergey Popov We had Jetta 3 years ago not a bad car, but when they changed the Jetta they dropped A LOT OF features and made the car look plain like a Honda/Turdota. I have to warm up to the styling, but we did like the suspension and seats of our Jetta. I hope the new models are the same.

I'm struggling with whether to be irrate with Toyota, slam them for resting on their laurels, or actually coming around to accepting their vehicles for what consumers actually want.

I guess there are a lot of car buyers that want a terrible driving, performing, optioned, overpriced car as long as it's good on gas, is reliable and has a low cost of ownership. Or they're loyal to Toyota and never even consider anything else let alone test drive something for comparison. Can't fault them for selling cars I guess.

@pont6000 As painful as it is, those Corolla buyers are blindly following because they trust Toyota. You should go read the the message boards on more mainstream news sites that have reviewed the Corolla, and most people there praise its vanilla-ness. They're happy because they know it'll last, because they've had past Corollas that have lasted. And thats all they care about. Toyota is truly living off it past reputation now for the majority of its sales. The only thing that will open those peoples eyes is time it seems.

@pont6000 Yep, drove a Corolla years ago as a rental car while mine was in for repair. It was terrible, bland to look at inside & out & I hated driving it because the steering was so awful. Looked at a couple of Toyota SUVs in 2005 before finally purchasing a Honda Pilot, which I thought had better steering, a more solid driving experience & had heavier, sturdy sounding doors, over the flimsy, tinny sounding Toyota doors. Still have the Honda today, along with a 2011 Kia Forte for daily driving, and love them both still. Kia is a hoot to drive down the twisty road near our house. Got the 173 HP SX 5 door hatch. Plan to keep it a few more years, maybe Kia can upgrade the cars for better crash tests by then.

I don't know if I agree with the fundamentals of this comparison or disagree to the point that I find it's conclusions are lacking.

They set a price range in choosing the vehicles, which led to a huge discrepancy in model, features and purpose of vehicle:

Base models: Honda, Toyota

Up-trim models: Kia, Hyundai and Mazda

Sportier models: VW, Dodge

In this way consumers could decide what ~$24000 will get them.....ok I get it......to a point.

Instead what they should have done was select comparable models (of whatever criteria they wanted) regardless of price, giving an actual comparison of vehicle attributes, and letting the consumer/reader decide which car is the best overall in performance, room, features, value, etc.

Apples to apples MT. Would you compare an SRT8 Challenger to a base Mustang even if they were the same price? Let the reader decide the value argument......you stick to testing the cars (the part your readers don't have access to).

@pont6000 I agree with you. Being Motor Trend one would think they would drop the electronic junk and go for the optional suspension/handling upgrade. Which is what I am doing in my research. I made a quick, simple spreadsheet for all the vehicles and I am comparing their prices with the lowest model that is available with optional suspension package. I also think they should have included more cars in the segment and Hatchbacks.

Despite popular belief, MT articles do not earn $ for the car manufacturers. In fact, after reading this article, I'm willing to bet a wealthy mans taco that it cost a couple car companies money out of their pocket to recieve such high praise from the staff. Maybe I'm kidding.

At the end of the day the Civic sells more cars than any other model in the class. For those of you screaming 'Toyota Corolla has more sales!", you have to realize Toyota does fleet sales, and includes them in their total # of units.

The good news is the opinions of everyone here in the comments section mean nothing.........the opinions of everyone involved in writing this article mean nothing. The only thing that matters is the car companies putting $ in their wallets. The undisputible fact is....Honda does it the best.

Come on Mazda and Kia. If you try really really hard, combined, you might sell half as many cars as Honda this year.

I started reading Motor Trend and ended up in a consumer reports article, about as boring a read as a Corolla is to drive. As a former Toyota Service advisor, the Corolla should have finished dead last, ugly, slow and completely mind numbing to drive. In fact they didn't even bother to bring any competitors cars for us to drive when the did the update. I am surprised that the Elantra Sport wasn't tested, same powertrain as the forte and even comes with a manual! I like the Mazda better as a hatch then a sedan, the Dart looks good, but it seems like a good first effort, the refresh will probably be much better, Jetta and Civic kings of meh. which leaves the Kia... make mine the Forte5 turbo with a manual

Personally the KIA deserves the number one spot on the list for having more features and being a quite and comfortable highway cruiser and having good driving dynamics. Mazda cutting on sound deadening material is a big no no for a commuter like myself and plus here in Canada mazda's are prone to rust and every mazda after to four to five years of ownership start to develop rust in Canada due the salty roads and mazda's cheap paint and metal.

@itsjessebabyThe Kia does not have the driving dynamics of the leaders in this group. Part of the reason for this is the lack of a multi-link independent rear suspension. Yes the car does have it's virtues with all the features and useless gadgets that are included but that is getting away from the basics of what makes a good car great.

The Mazda's have been prone to rust. Oh yes! I currently have a Protegé5 that won't make another winter because of the rust despite being getting rustproofing for the 1st 5 or 6 winters. My friends Civic of the same vintage still looks practically new. Note though that I recently read a long term test on the Mazda3 on one of the Canadian sites (maybe autos.ca or driving.ca) and they mentioned how the car got a deep scratch all the way to the metal during the test , and it didn't show any signs of corrosion. Mazda is now also offering a better corrosion guarantee to at least some (if not all) of their vehicles including the Mazda3. Based on this I would say that the worst of Mazda's corrosion woes are behind them.

I definitely agree with the Mazda coming first in test. I'd rank the Jetta higher than they did because the engine is fantastic, and I love how solid it feels. I also thought the ride/handling was really quite good, not too hard as they judge it in this comparison. Though I'm glad to see my criticisms of the price to kit relationship confirmed by MT. Their criticisms of the Dart seem to echo what I've always thought about it for the most part, as well. Though I could never comment on the engine noise or ride/handling. I don't really know much about the Honda, Hyundai, Kia, or Toyota, except that the Corolla is hideous and boring to drive. Now I also know it's slow and unsafe.

Overall, I'd say this is a good test. I was glad to see emphasis placed on driving enjoyment; the break-up of the test criteria led me to believe the results would be more of a Consumer Report type judgment. If I were to buy one of these, it would be a tough choice between the Mazda and the VW.

I agree about the Jetta. One thing to not about the Jetta is that VWs take a good 5k miles for their suspensions to "break in." My wife, who was pregnant at the time, experienced that the hard way in our Jetta. There are just too many engineering oversights in the Jetta, although it is probably the best overall size for the group.